COVID-19 AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN CLOSED INSTITUTIONS 2.3 Right to information Key aspects » Inclusive and transparent information can reduce tensions and increase the readiness to respect restrictions » Information was sometimes available in writing or provided orally (e.g. in small groups) Providing adequate information to persons deprived of liberty is key to counter their feelings of powerlessness and to ensure that they are aware of the existing regulations. Deriving from international standards, providing information about all matters necessary to adapt themselves to life when deprived of liberty is essential. It has to be ensured that the information is accessible and can be understood. Moreover, the persons concerned have the right to receive relevant information about the outside world as far as it is not necessarily restricted.39 Especially in such an unknown and unprecedented situation like the COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial to comprehensively inform persons deprived of liberty. This includes providing information on common symptoms, the contagion risks, and measures to prevent contracting the Coronavirus. In Austria, staff and persons concerned themselves emphasised that protective measures were better accepted once it was noticed that persons outside closed institutions experienced similarly severe restrictions to their daily lives. Besides, persons concerned would rather adhere to the rules if they understood their use and necessity. In Italy, the lack of information given to family members on the prison conditions, paired with the increasing anxiety generated by the exchanges of information in chat groups created by family members, led to severe tensions. In line, providing adequate information transparently and respectfully has a de-escalating effect. It helps reduce uncertainty, fear, violence, and the conception of the measures as arbitrary excuses to worsen the detention conditions. However, the range of whether and how persons concerned were informed varied widely between different institutions. In all three countries, some persons concerned reported that, especially in the initial stage, they had received no information at all or only when they proactively asked for it. In extreme, persons concerned only received information via the 9